Tag Archives: change in the church

I’ve mentioned before that I have two deal breaking issues with the Church.

Do the Brethren see the Lord or not?

And are they or are they not a part of the lay ministry we boast about?

A recent comment on this blog sums up my concern better than I can on the issue of the Brethren’s “special witness.” In part he says:

“I would call the current situation one of ‘deception by omission,’ because the top officers must know that many members believe that divine visitations are common among the higher ranks. The leaders allow this perception to exist and be perpetuated without challenge. Growing up in the church, I was taught by low and mid-level teachers and officers that the first presidency and the apostles know Christ personally, and that divine appearances in the temple are not uncommon.”

This idea of deception by omission, when I first considered it years ago and contemplated its implications, became a turning point for me. That was when the wheels started to fall off my paradigm.

Up until that point, not only did I believe that their witness was literal, but I also believed that they had achieved their witness by possessing strong faith and by having a firm mind in every form of godliness (Moroni 7:30). Which as you know is the pre-requisite for seeing Angels. To see the Lord, the Brethren must practically be Angels… So I thought.

But instead I began to feel mislead. I began to see this issue as an honesty issue. What kind of person would lie or mislead someone about something so sacred!? That idea began to stir in me and caused me tremendous grief.

I became curious about the idea of a lay ministry. Having served as a bishop and in bishoprics and on high councils, I knew first hand that we were not paid. Not at the local level. But as a bishop I began to notice some very strange things about the way certain people in my ward paid tithing. I noticed that General Authorities didn’t pay tithing through the ward at all. For that matter, they didn’t come to me or my counselors for their temple recommends either. Not seeing their tithing, I had no idea whether they were paid by the Church or not.

It wasn’t until I came across the leaked Mission Presidents Handbook that my suspicions on their “non-layness” were confirmed. Interestingly at about the same time I discovered this Handbook, I asked a member of my ward, who I had recommended to serve as a mission president, and who had just received his call, IF this was all true. My friend turned beet red and began to stutter. He eventually said, “I’ve sworn to secrecy that I will not discuss this.”

Well, that confirmed it. I had to then assume that the Brethren above Mission Presidents were also paid. But how much?

Admittedly, I assumed that some of the Brethren had to be paid something. I did not begrudge them some kind of housing, food, and travel assistance. I eased my mind by considering that they likely lived the Law of Consecration — a rumor I had heard many times. It made a lot of sense to me too. After all, if they were meeting with Jesus every Thursday, why would they not be living a higher law? Even if only among themselves.

I envisioned that men like Gary Stevenson would come into the Quorum of the Seventy and would give all they had to the Church. And that anyone among the Seventy or the Twelve that needed some minimal assistance would be able to receive it from the consecrated funds. Someone like Thomas Monson after all would not likely have a valuable pension or social security benefit when he became an apostle at the age of 36.

So to receive “assistance” to live a modest life was never an idea that bothered me.

But then I began to hear rumors that the Brethren were paid exorbitant amounts of money. Like, millions of dollars — Signing bonuses, huge salaries, pay increases for advancement and seniority, black credit cards…

These rumors alarmed me and made me want to know whether I had accidentally lied to all the people I’ve ever told, while holding up a picture of the leaders of the Church, that we were different (better) than all the other churches because “No one in our Church was paid to do anything. It’s a completely lay ministry.”

Back to this idea of “deception by omission” — I was concerned enough as it was about possibly being wrong about the Brethren’s benefits, but now I was confronted with the idea that they let me, in fact, they encouraged me to mislead people by never correcting the record.

Well, in the last few years I’ve been able to confirm a few more details on what our Church leaders make, which has now been corroborated with the most recent news.

Here is my opinion today what they do and don’t make and what benefits I believe they have:

No signing bonuses

No mortgage or debt pay offs

No unlimited Black Amex benefits

No pay increase or pay disparity among the Brethren. Once a 70 or higher, they receive the same “living allowance.”

“Living allowance” is $120,000 per year.

Great health benefits.

Free tuition at BYU or tuition paid at any university for children under age 26 up to the equivalent value of BYU’s tuition cost.

Great life insurance so their family is taken care of when they die.

Car allowances.

House allowances.

All travel, and lodging, food and entertainment while traveling are paid for. This includes First Class airfare.

I’m also left to assume that there is some tax benefit to calling it a living allowance from a 501c3. This is hinted at in the Mission President’s Handbook by the direction given to NOT report these benefits to tax advisors or on a tax return.

Now the argument I hear even from some is that most of these good men were wealthy before their callings and that full time Church service was not only a sacrifice in every way, but also represented a huge pay cut.

I find Kirby’s piece humorous, but I think his overall point is to downplay the amounts the Brethren are paid as kind of a “Well, that’s nowhere near enough money for me” and so no one should have a problem with it. He says:

If you were to pay me for wearing a necktie even to bed, while simultaneously trying to keep people on the straight and narrow without a machine gun, it would have to be at least seven figures, each and every one of them a nine.

I earn a lot less than that as a newspaper columnist. How much? Well, it’s none of your *&#@% business, is it? I do what I do for what I make because it’s an acceptable bargain between myself and a tough editor.

Sadly, I think we Mormons are conditioned to say the kinds of things Kirby says. I actually happen to know thousands of people who WOULD do what these men do and they would do it for FREE! They would do it for the glory, prestige, power, and/or for the value of service. In fact many elderly couples do do this sort of thing for free, without any glory, all the time. The Church sells it to them as a wonderful opportunity to live in Africa for the low low price of only $1400 per month.

Stake presidents and bishops, many or whom work 40-60 hours per week already and then have added to them 20-30 hours of church service, do it for free already Mr. Kirby.

This argument that these men do something special and that they took a pay cut for, frankly, ticks me off. They should want to do it for free. Since when do we need to justify that Apostles of the Lord should be paid large salaries? Most of them are called when they already have pensions and retirements and social security in place. So why are we talking about pay cuts? Do we really want to believe that President Monson, who is paid the equivalent of $240,000 or more a year, WOULD BE MAKING MORE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR? AT AGE 89? I’m sorry but anyone willing to pay Thomas Monson in his current mental state and at his age $240k a year is a complete moron. The argument is disingenuous at best, especially given that we boldly declare that these men are not paid anything.

A great blog post was recently written on this topic. I highly recommend it. In it the author covers the history of minister salaries in the latter-day Church. But, for me the biggest issue is that we all are taught and are encouraged to teach that there is no paid ministry — the Brethren know we teach this — and NO ONE CORRECTS the record. This is a dishonest omission of facts.

Simultaneously Senator Gordon Smith argues in the executive committees of the 12 that the other Christian religions participate in the dangerous practice of priestcraft, all while we are apparently innocent of such abhorrent practices. Why did the Brethren not correct the record with Senator Smith, in that private setting?

I’m sorry my friends, but $120,000 per year in “living allowance” plus all the other great benefits adding up to at least $240,000 per year is a far cry from a lay ministry. I wish the Church would at least be honest about it instead of misleading everyone.

For Alma it was far more cut and dry:

And notwithstanding the many labors which I have performed in the church, I have never received so much as even onesenine for my labor; neither has any of my brethren, save it were in the judgment-seat; and then we have received only according to law for our time (Alma 30:33).

Our church leaders have taken millions of senines and yet some of them still profit from their personal enterprises as well. Doesn’t sound like much of a sacrifice to me. It’s certainly not what we preach it to be: A Lay Ministry. In fact, I wonder if LDS Church leaders actually make more than other various religious leaders around the world. Either way, the leaders of the Church should come clean and set the record straight on the issue and allow Church members to decide for themselves if the money we pay them is appropriate or not.

The other Comforter spoken of is a subject of great interest, and perhaps understood by few of this generation. After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted.

When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure, then it will be his privilege to receive the other Comforter, which the Lord hath promised the Saints, as is recorded in the testimony of St. John, in the 14th chapter, from the 12th to the 27th verses.

Note the 16, 17, 18, 21, 23 verses: [Quoted.]

Now what is this other Comforter? It is no more nor less than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself; and this is the sum and substance of the whole matter; that when any man obtains this last Comforter, he will have the personage of Jesus Christ to attend him, or appear unto him from time to time, and even He will manifest the Father unto him, and they will take up their abode with him, and the visions of the heavens will be opened unto him, and the Lord will teach him face to face, and he may have a perfect knowledge of the mysteries of the Kingdom of God; and this is the state and place the ancient Saints arrived at when they had such glorious visions–Isaiah, Ezekiel, John upon the Isle of Patmos, St. Paul in the three heavens, and all the Saints who held communion with the general assembly and Church of the Firstborn.

Calling and Election

Now, there is some grand secret here, and keys to unlock the subject. Notwithstanding the apostle exhorts them to add to their faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, etc., yet he exhorts them to make their calling and election sure. And though they had heard an audible voice from heaven bearing testimony that Jesus was the Son of God [Mt 17:5], yet he says we have a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as unto a light shining in a dark place. Now, wherein could they have a more sure word of prophecy than to hear the voice of God saying, This is my beloved Son?

Now for the secret and grand key. Though they might hear the voice of God and know that Jesus was the Son of God, this would be no evidence that their calling and election was made sure, that they were sealed in the heavens and had the promise of eternal life in the kingdom of God. Then, having this promised sealed unto them, it was an anchor to the soul, sure and steadfast. Though the thunders might roll and lightnings flash, and earthquakes bellow, and war gather thick around, yet this hope and knowledge would support the soul in every hour of trial, trouble and tribulation. Then knowledge through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the grand key that unlocks the glories and mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.

Salvation through Knowledge

It is not wisdom that we should have all knowledge at once presented before us; but that we should have a little at a time; then we can comprehend it. President Smith then read the 2nd Epistle of Peter, 1st chapter, 16th to last verses, and dwelt upon the 19th verse with some remarks.

Add to you faith knowledge, etc. The principle of knowledge is the principle of salvation. This principle can be comprehended by the faithful and diligent; and every one that does not obtain knowledge sufficient to be saved will be condemned. The principle of salvation is given us through the knowledge of Jesus Christ. (TPJS)

Why are we so quick to assume that we are saved or will be saved merely because we have joined the Church, participated in ordinances, and are enduring to the end through home teaching, church service and temple work?

Why does the Church now openly condemn those who prefer Joseph’s admonitions over today’s Church leaders’?

Why would the Lord allow all the prophets of scripture including Joseph Smith to openly testify they have seen Angels and the Lord, only to then instruct all of Joseph’s successors to never testify of the same?

Is it possible today’s Church leaders have never entertained Angels or been in the Lord’s presence? If they have not, what would this change? If they have not, why would they lead people to believe they are special witnesses? And have a “sure knowledge”? Why would we still call them Prophets, Seers, and Revelators?

Is it possible that Joseph’s words below apply to our Church today?:

Compare this principle once with Christendom (the LDS Church)? at the present day, and where are they, with all their boasted religion, piety and sacredness while at the same time they are crying out against prophets, apostles, angels, revelations, prophesying and visions, etc. Why, they are just ripening for the damnation of hell. They will be damned, for they reject the most glorious principle of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and treat with disdain and trample under foot the key that unlocks the heavens and puts in our possession the glories of the celestial world. Yes, I say, such will be damned, with all their professed godliness. Then I would exhort you to go on and continue to call upon God until you make your calling and election sure for yourselves, by obtaining this more sure word of prophecy, and wait patiently for the promise until you obtain it. (TPJS)

Are we “crying out against prophets, apostles, angels, revelations, prophesying and visions, etc.”? Is that what today’s leaders are doing when they warn us that making calling and election a focal point is a “tactic of the adversary?” (Dallin Oaks) Are they crying against Joseph Smith and his revelations?

Why do we assume that God is not just IF only a few are saved?

And it came to pass that when Jesus had ended these sayings he said unto his disciples: Enter ye in at the strait gate; for strait is the gate, and narrow is the way that leads to life, and few there be that find it; but wide is the gate, and broad the way which leads to death, and many there be that travel therein, until the night cometh, wherein no man can work (3 Nephi 27:33).

Is it because we assume that God cannot damn most of His children and still be just, merciful, and loving? Do we ignore the scriptures at our own peril? Do we not understand eternity and eternal progression?

One of my dear friend’s keeps reminding me, “Joseph taught a fundamentally different gospel than the one we teach today.” I think he’s right.

In a recent meeting Elder Bednar was supposedly asked a question by a sister missionary about women and the priesthood. He’s said to have given his own thoughts about the subject and when he concluded, the sister asked a follow up question. “Are there any scriptures that talk about this subject?” Elder Bednar responded, “I am scripture.”

Now in fairness to Elder Bednar, I’ve heard this account from two different sources both in attendance at this meeting, and thus I relate the story relying upon second hand information. If any readers have also heard this same story, please correct or confirm the details.

My first reaction to such a statement is not good. Yet I fully understand as an LDS person raised in the church, that Elder Bednar is only stating what we teach. “When a ‘prophet’ speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, it is scripture.” Elder Bednar obviously considers himself a prophet and many of us sustain him in that calling.

But, we are also taught that “when any person speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, it is scripture.”

So why give more credence to the words of Elder Bednar than say… someone else claiming to speak by the Holy Ghost? The standard LDS answer is “because God’s house is a house of order and that’s why keys are so important. Whoever has the keys AND speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost is who you listen to.”

For nearly 170 years (post-Joseph), these men we sustain as Prophets, Seers, and Revelators have been able to more or less say “Let it be written, for I am scripture.” Their Conference talks are immortalized and their words are given as lessons and talks and made into refrigerator magnets all around the world for years and decades to come.

The Immortalized Words of General Conference

But to what end?

For me when someone (and I mean anyone, besides The Lord) says something akin to “I am scripture” the effect is to shut down any and all further communication or questions. The same can be said of many statements we tend to make as Mormons.

I’m reminded of a missionary companion who liked to one-up investigators who disagreed by “boldly” bearing his testimony. Its effect? The conversation usually stopped awkwardly. He taught other missionaries this principle too. “Whenever you can’t answer a question, just bear your testimony (really hard).”

One time we were having a great discussion with a Catholic gentleman. He was hung up on The Book of Mormon. His questions and concerns were sincere. Then it came. “Sir, I know The Book or Mormon is true beyond a shadow of any doubt and that this church is the only true and living church on the whole earth!” This man replied with his own testimony. “Well, I know The Book of Mormon is NOT true and that your church is NOT the only true church on the whole earth!” My companion was taken aback. I waited for him to say “IS NOT!” like a 4-year old who has no logical arguments left. Fortunately he didn’t.

To be fair, our investigator wasn’t saying he “knew” anything. He was merely demonstrating how strange and immature such grand statements sounded to him and how off-putting they were. The conversation usually just ends.

Even to members of the church familiar with such bravado, the effect of these traditional tactics can be very damaging.

To say “I know God lives,” five times in a row, for example, while increasing the pauses in between sentences, while climactically raising the tone of your voice each time, may just lead someone to believe you have literally stood in the Lord’s presence. This was a technique I observed from the late Elder Loren C. Dunn. If he had not actually seen God, would this be a good thing to do? Might this cause people to treat someone as a light and heap upon them their praise?

I spoke to a brother recently who provides security detail for the Brethren when they come to his area. He is a trained police officer. He told me that when an Apostle, Prophet or even a Seventy come nowadays, there are members who try to find out what hotel they are staying in so they can stalk them and try to meet them. He recently had to rescue a visiting GA from an overly excited LDS crowd, literally removing him from danger. The spared GA told this brother that it’s getting worse and worse as they travel around the world.

Curious, I asked why he believed members reacted like this around the Brethren. He said “It’s like they’re rock stars and people think that because they know the Savior, that if they can just touch them, something amazing will happen!” He then went on to say that a full grown man from his stake boasted that he shook Elder Ballard’s hand and was “never going to wash it again.”

Such adoration and idolatry is anti-Zion and anti-Christ. All of us can learn a lesson from this. Maybe you or I are not tempted by GA celebrity status, but our own claims may cause others to look to us as a light instead of to Him.

The Savior’s Example

The Savior of the world epitomized meekness and humility. When he was called “good,” he objected and deflected all praise to God (Matthew 19:17). When he gave talks, he quoted scripture, giving all recognition to the prophet he quoted. This despite the fact that it was He, the Great Jehovah, who had given the quote to begin with. Unlike any mortal, “prophet or not,” Jesus IS literally the Word of God. He, and only He, is Scripture.

When Jesus taught He did not often make bold self-promoting proclamations to induce obedience or to enhance his bona fides. Clearly He was entitled to, but He more often said:

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment. (Matthew 5:21) or “Blessed are the meek…”

He could have just as easily said “I am the Great Jehovah who once commanded you, Thou shalt not kill…” or “I the God of Heaven and Earth command you to be meek now before I pull your temple recommend.”

Jesus does not use His power and authority to compel obedience and adoration.

Although perfect Himself, He invited others to “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48)

Jesus speaks in plainness and humility.

And then shall ye know that I have seen Jesus, and that he hath talked with me face to face, and that he told me in plain humility, even as a man telleth another in mine own language, concerning these things… (Ether 12:39)

Notice that Moroni’s claims are also plain, overt, and factual. He doesn’t leave the audience guessing whether he did or did not see the Lord.

Some Ideas to Consider

Whether leader or layperson, none of us is perfect. We can benefit from each others’ feedback and prayers. It’s a humbling and difficult experience to recognize or be made aware of our weaknesses. The Brethren need not feel threatened, condemned or judged by our feedback. They deserve our help as much as we deserve theirs. Furthermore, it is incumbent upon us to discern when they or anyone act and speak in the Lord’s name, otherwise we do them no favors and we only damn ourselves.

Here are just a few suggestions that I think would help us as members to NOT idolize the Brethren as well as to not set ourselves up as lights unto the world (2 Nephi 26:29).

We should never mislead people about what we know. We should not exaggerate our claims. If we haven’t seen Jesus or Angels, we should not make people believe we have. We should not mislead others about it by speaking in circles or by emphasizing how special our witness is. Let’s be honest and humble and direct ALL praise to our Lord. Only He can save.

Most of us can all do better in deflecting compliments and praise. Jesus said we should not even call one another Rabbi, which is to say Master or Teacher (Matthew 23:7). In my ward the CES contingency take turns suggesting that the other is one of the “Great Master Teachers of the Kingdom.” I believe such things to be devilish and destructive and yet all of us are tempted to heap praise upon each other. It’s our culture.

We should not often call people by their full names preceded with titles. Let’s drop the words president, elder, beloved, prophet, seer, revelator, general authority, etc. from our vocabulary when addressing someone. EVEN Jesus said to not call Him good! Do we really suppose He would have liked to be called Our Beloved President Jesus (add initial) Christ, Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, while in mortality? To do so is to desecrate Him; His calling. Why should we be greater than He? He was called “Jesus.” That should serve as our model when speaking to or about each other, no matter our calling. Titles and initials inflate egos.

Church Leaders not speaking at General Conference would send a powerful message if they did NOT sit on the stand. In fact, they could even dress normally, i.e. not to the nines in expensive suits and dresses (fine twined linen?) and they could serve as Ushers and Parking Attendants and assist the infirm. They should consider standing at the doorways rather than sitting in plush red seats where all can see. Didn’t the Savior teach us to be servants especially when we are viewed as greatest? (Matthew 32:11). Let the poor and the elderly sit in those seats.

General Authority families should not be given preferential seats at General Conference. They should not occupy the entire front section of the Conference Center as they currently do. These people should get in line with the rest of us for tickets. Why not let first year converts or investigators sit in those seats? Or the handicapped?

NO calling in the church should EVER BE REMUNERATED nor should anyone receive a stipend who teaches or serves in the church (Mosiah 18:24). The church knows that its 80,000+ missionaries and its 3+ million active members of the church tell everyone that what makes us different from all other churches is that no one is paid. The Brethren KNOW this is what we tell people. And yet some of us KNOW this is not true. It’s simply wrong to encourage the lie by not correcting the record. It’s dishonest. It’s immoral. It would be one thing perhaps if the brethren were merely being supported. This is simply not true. They earn very large sums of money as a direct result of their callings. The church needs to come clean and set the record straight and deal with the consequences.

ALL transactions and expenditures ought to be made available for members to see. Every contract, every piece of property bought or sold, every trip, every personal expense, every stipend, every salary, every bonus, every royalty ought to be made public.

Church leaders should not fly First Class as I have witnessed on more than one occasion. For those of you that don’t think this possible, here is a recent picture of President Nelson.

He’s apparently on an International flight from SLC to Germany, traveling with Elder Hallstrom accompanied by their wives and someone who appears to be Elder Nelson’s bodyguard (far right in the picture) ALL flying First Class. Retail price of each ticket? $13,000. Coach price? $1300. What would be wrong with sitting in a regular seat with normal folks? It would sure save a lot of tithing money. One ticket at this price is equal to two years of tithing for a person who makes $65,000 per year. Fifty people could have flown for the price likely paid for these five tickets! One ticket would pay for an entire mission for a young man or young woman who cannot afford it.

Are these men so frail and so important that they can’t sit in a normal airplane seat? Why not just pay the extra $100 for more leg room? “But everyone would bother them if they were in coach” one might argue. But, isn’t that their calling? To preach the gospel whenever they can? I’ve heard more than one apostle say we should pray when we get on a flight that we will be able to share the gospel with someone seated next to us. How does the future prophet of the church do that here surrounded by his wife on his right and protected by hired muscle on his left?

Church leaders should not be served the sacrament first, but rather should bless it and administer it as servants to the congregation as the D&C teaches.

There are many small but important changes the church could make that I believe would both help the church to better conform with scripture as well as prevent people from leaving. Again, brothers and sisters, it’s our duty as members of Christ’s church to sustain these men in their callings by sharing our concerns. We need not be angry or revile against anyone. We can share our concerns with love. If we don’t, then who will? Anti-Mormons? It is far better that we encourage positive change from within by “common consent” than have it imposed upon us by the wrath of God, when it’s likely too late. We who believe in the Restoration must open our mouths. Those in the chief seats would do well to stop trying to silence those who offer their concerns. It’s our church too. The Savior’s message to the church leaders of his day seems to still apply to us in our day. Will we heed the call of our Master?

And Jesus said unto his disciples, Beholdest thou the scribes, and the Pharisees, and the priests, and the Levites? They teach in their synagogues, but do not observe the law, nor the commandments; and all have gone out of the way, and are under sin. Go thou and say unto them, Why teach ye men the law and the commandments, when ye yourselves are the children of corruption? Say unto them, Ye hypocrites, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye. (JST Matthew 7:6-8)

I recall sitting in a special meeting called by our stake president a couple years ago, where we were asked to make sure everyone in our wards, including the youth, were on Facebook ASAP. We were then instructed to go to the Prophet’s Facebook page and “Like” him, as well as the other general authorities. Ironically, at that same time, I was feeling prompted to hold a special fireside for parents of the youth to talk to them about my very serious concerns over our children’s time wasted online and the dangers of pornography and sexting, which were ever so prevalent in our ward. The message I felt inspired to share seemed to fall on deaf ears with the sudden push by the church to get more connected and to go online more.

Elder Bednar was also simultaneously asking our youth to go online (on their smart devices) to do indexing. My kids came home from those meetings with all kinds of new “revelatory” reasons for why we needed to buy them iPhones. It was hard enough that all their church friends all had phones, and now pressure, instead of support, from the top.

And yet not too many years ago it seemed like every general conference talk was warning us about the dangers of the Internet. “Keep your computer in the kitchen in the view of everyone,” for example. Now, every 10-18 year old youth in my ward (practically), has their own hand held smart device. Most kids who confessed a pornography problem during my tenure said their problem began with their smart phone, often while sitting in the living room with their whole family present, “talking.”

The clear message from the church for many years was one of great caution regarding the Internet and such access. Here’s a sample talk from that era from President Hinckley.

You can read the entire talk by clicking on the image above.

“This is not the only letter I have received. There have been enough that I am convinced this is a very serious problem even among us. It arises from many sources and expresses itself in a variety of ways. Now it is compounded by the Internet. That Internet is available not only to adults but also to young people.

I recently read that pornography has become a $57 billion industry worldwide. Twelve billion of this is derived in the United States by evil and “conspiring men” (see D&C 89:4) who seek riches at the expense of the gullible. It is reported that it produces more revenue in the United States than the “combined revenues of all professional football, baseball and basketball franchises or the combined revenues of ABC, CBS, and NBC” (“Internet Pornography Statistics: 2003,” Internet, http://www.healthymind.com/5-port-stats.html).”

And now, the message from the top seems to be, “If you don’t have a Facebook page, or a Twitter account, or you’re not LinkedIn, not texting, or at a minimum equipped with a smart device, get with the program!” In its desire perhaps to improve its image, to preach the gospel online, do more Family History, to rank higher in the search engines, or perhaps even to fight against anti-Mormon messages online, the leaders of the church now encourage members getting online. I understand the church has whole departments at the church office building (COB) devoted to such efforts. Missionary couples and others are also called as full-time volunteers to work in the cyber trenches for the church. It’s really quite amazing.

The church also seems to spend a lot of money on Google Adword campaigns. I find it somewhat amusing that when I do a Google Search for “Pure Mormonism,” I often see the LDS Church’s Pay Per Click (PPC) ad, by itself at the top, just above Rock Waterman’s Pure Mormonism blogspot. This means that the church is paying for that keyword search (Pure Mormonism) and seems intent on intercepting people searching that term.

As a side note, I remember in a leadership training meeting where Elder Bednar told the story of how he was asked the following question: “How are you guys (referring to the brethren) so in tune with the Lord?” Elder Bednar’s response was interesting. “First of all,” he said “we are not ‘guys’. We are prophets, seers, and revelators. We are special witnesses. Don’t refer to us as guys.” (I caveat that I mean no disrespect to Elder Bednar. I simply relay the experience as I recall it.)

But, in the same training and later that weekend, Elder Bednar used words like “rad, dude, gnarly, and freakin'” and he gave all the youth “his” cell phone number and asked them to text him. Oh and to go “like’ their Facebook pages. The social media push feels very much like a “guys” and “dudes” attempt to make the world “Like” us more.

Showing a further commitment to the church’s new direction, missionaries in many parts of the world are now required to bring an ipad to the MTC. Now, I admit that it is perhaps easy to critique such decisions from a distance. Some commentators have already criticized me for doing so. But, I will say that as a parent, the last thing I want my child to have on their mission is an iPad. Some of the miracles I saw with young men overcoming pornography were because they were sent to places like Mexico and were disconnected from such distractions. I could tell numerous stories, were I permitted to, of missionaries who came home early because they went online in the mission field and got into trouble.

Now, some of you may be saying, “But Bishop Anon! You sound like an old dud unwilling to adapt! These kids will be online whether we like it or not, so why bury our heads in the sand? Let’s get them online using such devices to ‘Do the Lord’s work!'” I get that concern and can respect the argument, to a degree.

I guess my feelings are mixed. I grew up in the church being told we were peculiar and that we should not try to be like “the world”. I grew up on the East coast. We were often confused with Mennonites, Quakers, and the Amish. I was taught it was okay if people didn’t “like” us. It seemed like even in a modernizing and changing time, we were still being taught to be somewhat old-fashioned and to be careful about our focus on the worldly and about ever becoming too up with the times or sophisticated.

Here’s an interesting quote from Harold B. Lee:

“Our failure to be a “peculiar” people in maintaining our standards, despite the jeers and the criticisms of the crowd, will be our failure to be chosen for that calling to which we are called. The Lord has told us, “Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen” (D&C 121:34), and then in the same revelation points out two reasons why men fail of their blessings. The first reason he gives is that their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and the second is that they aspire so much to the honors of men.So then as Church members let us beware lest we set our hearts upon the things of this world and lest we aspire so much to the honors of men that we compromise our standards. If we do so, we will be cut off in the Day of Judgment and will lose our blessings. Our reward for daring to live the gospel despite the oppositions from the outside world will be to have blessings added upon our heads forever and forever.”

I not saying that all technology is evil or wrong. But, I believe our obsession with being popular with the world, wasting countless hours in so called urgent stake meetings teaching other leaders and members how to “Like” each other, and our encouragement of more time online, feels to me like a step in the wrong direction.